Las Vegas Mandalay Bay Mass Shooting

[98type_r]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

why is kinder surprise banned in the states again?

Some law about non-functional materials inside food. A stick for lollipop is ok, toys inside food are not.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The point is why go through all that trouble when you can just use guns that are so easy to buy... It you use a van you rush losing a tire, crashing into something, getting shot, etc. The whole point is that it's fucking easy to kill people and it's efficient, and on top of that, the government practically begs you to buy them.

Automatic weapons are not easy to buy - his were either highly modified or illegally obtained, both which requires a lot of effort. Also all those same risks you list about a van would apply to a firearm (it could jam, malfunction, you could get shot, etc.) never mind the fact that there is a lot of skill involved in using it effectively, where there isn't really for a vehicle. It's not really going to any trouble to rent a vehicle either. See my previous explanation, but his attack was *incredibly* inefficient. Absolutely horrible in fact. Given the advantages he had with all that firepower, positioning, etc. the death toll was extremely low. It's also not easy at all to kill people, 99.8% of people survived his 'fish in a barrel' attack in which he had every advantage, 20+ firearms, thousands of rounds, the cover of darkness, and about an hour of uninterrupted shooting. For something that is supposedly so effective at killing, he sure did a good job of showing the opposite.

[dj_patm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I didn't say that they didn't have a fundamental right to an abortion. I said that they don't have the constitutional right to an abortion, IN THE SAME way that they have a constitutional right to own firearms.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah let's just ignore the fact that they have a constitutional right to own firearms, and pretend one exists for forcing one to pay for others healthcare.

Constitutions can be Amended. Do I have to quote Jim Jefferies and remind you that the reason they have the constitutional right to own firearms is cause of an Amendment?

And I'm saying the fact that they're so crazy about keeping that amendment about gun ownership yet they're so against "paying for others healthcare" tells you all you need to know about how fucked up that group is.

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

both which requires a lot of effort

Well... I wouldn't go that far. My understanding is it is quite doable for most people to do the conversions themselves. Even then, as many articles have mentioned, full auto is basically useless when you can skip 80% of the difficulty to converting to full auto and still get 9 or 10 round burst weapons. I don't think a 9 or 10 round burst versus full on spray and pray would have made a lick of a difference.

And as a bit of a segue, I bet Catalonians would love to have the right to bear arms enshrined in the constitution right now. Gun rights, when properly viewed, are to prevent terrorism of the state against its own population. Most Canadians don't really understand that, but lots of us weren't around when marshal law was enacted during the October crisis. That's pretty scary shit, you basically go from our (fake, ignorant) democracy to zero rights in no time.

It amuses me how naive people are. At the end of the day, you need to protect yourself. When the rubber meets the road, you can only rely on yourself. And that is why the USA has a LOT of society done right. It just so happens, to actually be free, there are sacrifices that are made.

Somebody posted an article on facebook comparing gun violence in America to gun violence in Japan. Well, per capita, Japan has triple the suicide rate of the USA, and overall more people die by suicide in Japan in a year than the overall amount of people who die by gun violence (LARGELY by gang-on-gang violence, the horror, my heart bleeds for them) in the USA.

[dj_patm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It was interesting to note the double standard amongst progressives the last coupled days. In the wake of Edmonton (as with many other radical islamic terrorist attacks, or shooting's that don't fit their narrative), people on the left our all about "unity", "love", and "standing up to hate". Their representatives essentially tell us that this is all part in parcel of living in a bit city and we just have to get used to this, some even go as far as to point the finger at "us" the people for the playing a role with this hate. However, there is no call to action against our leaders, or scrutinizing our current laws or asking questions. Yet within an hour of this Vegas shooting (and others that fit their narrative), these same people could care less about "standing together" or "unity", "standing up against hate". It was all about a call to action immediately, as if there was this magic solution that was sitting right there if only they would do it.

Because the proposed solutions to one incident involves trying to discriminate people by religion and skin color and breeds unwarranted hate while the other one is simply suggesting maybe you should sell people less guns or at least less deadly and efficient guns ....

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No they don't have it IN THE SAME way, but they have it nonetheless. There's a reason a state can't just ban abortions because it wants to and instead need to resort to limiting the availability and the ease of getting one to restrict them as much as possible.



So what I'm saying is that what you said is meaningless.

I think the differences do matter, because the constitutional right to abortion, wasn't explicitly mentioned or intended in it's creation of the 14th amendment. This "right" was created in the 70's by seven judges who found a way to allow a right to an abortion based on their superseding principles of privacy. Many legal experts would argue that Roe Vs. Wade was unconstitutional, and will probably continue do so. However, in terms of your example, the reason why its not an accurate comparison is because the very nature of the abortion law, allows infringements in regards to fetal viability.

So when you post an illustration that tries to show infringements upon abortion, like waiting periods, ultra sounds, parental permission etc......These are mostly standard medical procedures that are fully necessary and within abortion law, not infringements. Abortion clinics don't ultrasound their patients, have a bunch of paperwork with a waiting period, get parental permission, make them watch a video and get a doctors note because they want to restrict their patients. They do it because they are about to perform a surgical procedure that can carry serious risks with it, like they would do with any other medical procedure. They also need to determine how far along a woman is, to make sure they are upholding the abortion law, not infringing upon it.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He wasn't debating their constitutional rights, just common sense. Who gives a fuck about their constitution. The point is that their society is ass backwards when its easier to buy an automatic weapon and mow down a crowd of people than going to the hospital and getting a broken leg fixed if you don't have private healthcare.

Their constitution was written over 200 years ago, it needs to be completely reformed. End of story, take your dumbass debates somewhere else.

At that is what makes it extremely difficult for Canadians to discuss American politics. While you certainty don't care about the constitution, it is the foundation to which all legal matters are to be dealt with. Not only that but their leaders must pledge to uphold it. Your also completely incorrect to suggest that its easier to buy a automatic weapon then to go to the hospital and get a broken leg.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well... I wouldn't go that far. My understanding is it is quite doable for most people to do the conversions themselves.

That may be true, but in the context of it being less effort than renting a vehicle, I don't think it's easier. You need parts, the skill, and the know how to do a conversion. Anyone can rent a vehicle in 5 minutes. Whatever he did, it was extremely ineffective, and whether that was due to his skill level or other hardware issues or something else we will probably never know.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Because the proposed solutions to one incident involves trying to discriminate people by religion and skin color and breeds unwarranted hate while the other one is simply suggesting maybe you should sell people less guns or at least less deadly and efficient guns ....

This terrorist came to this country, and expressed radical islamic beliefs for years. Why is it hateful to ask how these views weren't caught during his immigration process or what more could have been done after he expressed his radical beliefs?

It seems rather obvious that we should discriminate against those who want to this country who not only don't want to partake in our way of life, but instead are intent on destroying it. I'm open to hearing how you view this all as hateful, and see it as discriminating on the basis of a whole religion or skin color?

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the differences do matter, because the constitutional right to abortion, wasn't explicitly mentioned or intended in it's creation of the 14th amendment. This "right" was created in the 70's by seven judges who found a way to allow a right to an abortion based on their superseding principles of privacy. Many legal experts would argue that Roe Vs. Wade was unconstitutional, and will probably continue do so. However, in terms of your example, the reason why its not an accurate comparison is because the very nature of the abortion law, allows infringements in regards to fetal viability.

So when you post an illustration that tries to show infringements upon abortion, like waiting periods, ultra sounds, parental permission etc......These are mostly standard medical procedures that are fully necessary and within abortion law, not infringements. Abortion clinics don't ultrasound their patients, have a bunch of paperwork with a waiting period, get parental permission, make them watch a video and get a doctors note because they want to restrict their patients. They do it because they are about to perform a surgical procedure that can carry serious risks with it, like they would do with any other medical procedure. They also need to determine how far along a woman is, to make sure they are upholding the abortion law, not infringing upon it.

Then you can put similar roadblocks in place to prevent people from owning guns. It's not about infringing upon their rights to own them, it's for a bunch of other bullshit you can sell it on when in reality it's purposefully designed to make it as hard and undesirable to have one.

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That may be true, but in the context of it being less effort than renting a vehicle, I don't think it's easier. You need parts, the skill, and the know how to do a conversion. Anyone can rent a vehicle in 5 minutes. Whatever he did, it was extremely ineffective, and whether that was due to his skill level or other hardware issues or something else we will probably never know.

I don't disagree.

What I will say though, is that running over that many people would be quite difficult in my non-expert, non-anything opinion. I drive a lot. Vehicles are easy to dodge as their range of motion is limited at the speeds you would need to impact people at.

So you would basically have to find a large crowd of people on a street. THAT would be tough. The guy obviously planned this crap out, its disgusting. But the only way he could have done more damage as a single individual would have been with bombs. I guess he could have lobbed grenades.

Makes me sick just thinking about it What would drive a person to do that? This was premeditated, but in a big way. Its not like he walked into a building of people he had a problem with... jesus.

[Gman.45]

Well... I wouldn't go that far. My understanding is it is quite doable for most people to do the conversions themselves. Even then, as many articles have mentioned, full auto is basically useless when you can skip 80% of the difficulty to converting to full auto and still get 9 or 10 round burst weapons. I don't think a 9 or 10 round burst versus full on spray and pray would have made a lick of a difference.

And as a bit of a segue, I bet Catalonians would love to have the right to bear arms enshrined in the constitution right now. Gun rights, when properly viewed, are to prevent terrorism of the state against its own population. Most Canadians don't really understand that, but lots of us weren't around when marshal law was enacted during the October crisis. That's pretty scary shit, you basically go from our (fake, ignorant) democracy to zero rights in no time.

It amuses me how naive people are. At the end of the day, you need to protect yourself. When the rubber meets the road, you can only rely on yourself. And that is why the USA has a LOT of society done right. It just so happens, to actually be free, there are sacrifices that are made.

Somebody posted an article on facebook comparing gun violence in America to gun violence in Japan. Well, per capita, Japan has triple the suicide rate of the USA, and overall more people die by suicide in Japan in a year than the overall amount of people who die by gun violence (LARGELY by gang-on-gang violence, the horror, my heart bleeds for them) in the USA.

Agreed.

Since it keeps coming up, I'll explain again - you do NOT need any special gunsmith skills to convert an AR or AK rifle to full auto. An AR rifle, you can get the jig off Ebay (in Canada or the USA), the lower F/A parts kit (legal, here and the USA, just not legal to install in Canada), and the full auto bolt carrier group (typically is in most AR 15s from the factory anyway these days as they are heavier and have better functionality over the dedicated semi auto versions of yore). A 150$ drill press, the jib, the internet, and ta da. For legal reasons, I'll just say it's a very simple number of operations with a drill press, then remove old fire control parts, install new FA ones (2 minutes tops), and ta da, full auto. AGAIN, this isn't even necessary, as per the video in my last post, and as per the audio clips from the shooting, is 99% likely this guy just used one of the many bump/slide fire stocks, which makes a semi auto AR15 shoot 10 or more rounds per second while holding the trigger down, replicating full auto fire, even though technically the rifle is still only semi auto without that goofy stock on it, which uses physics and recoil to affect the firing mechanism of the rifle, and keeps it firing while holding down that trigger.

Also, limited ammunition - it's simple to manufacturer your own, even if they banned power and primers, same thing, we can't legislate our way out of this problem. Gun ban would = civil war in the USA, and at the very least a political nightmare even up here if Ottawa tried that. Short of a outright firearms ban, no law will keep you or the public "safe". A good deer rifle with a decent optic, this guy could have caused even MORE fatalities, albeit less wounded, due to the very close range - 600 feet - making kill shots a virtually certainly with every press of the trigger, even for an amateur, which he wasn't, he was an avid hunter in Alaska.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Constitutions can be Amended. Do I have to quote Jim Jefferies and remind you that the reason they have the constitutional right to own firearms is cause of an Amendment?

And I'm saying the fact that they're so crazy about keeping that amendment about gun ownership yet they're so against "paying for others healthcare" tells you all you need to know about how fucked up that group is.

Absolutely, and that is why democrats should stop trying to dance around the issue, and instead go after the 2nd amendment. Until then, expect alot more Americans to care about their right to own firearms, then they do paying for someone else's healthcare. I also think its unfair to paint the healthcare issue, as one that is primarily based on a selfishness of not wanting to pay for others. There are many aspects to the healthcare debate, whether its a single payer system, mixed system, private or insurance involvment etc, and people can be against certain health care systems that the democrats are proposing, because they generally think it will do more harm than good.

[msommers]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

why is kinder surprise banned in the states again?

[dj_patm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This terrorist came to this country, and expressed radical islamic beliefs for years. Why is it hateful to ask how these views weren't caught during his immigration process or what more could have been done after he expressed his radical beliefs?

It seems rather obvious that we should discriminate against those who want to this country who not only don't want to partake in our way of life, but instead are intent on destroying it. I'm open to hearing how you view this all as hateful, and see it as discriminating on the basis of a whole religion or skin color?

Oh definitely, it should have been caught and it's a failure that it wasn't but you also have to keep in mind there is only so much they can do before you get into some sketchy areas. Should you be locked in jail based on your browsing history? For how long? What can and can't you visit?

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Also, limited ammunition - it's simple to manufacturer your own, even if they banned power and primers, same thing, we can't legislate our way out of this problem. Gun ban would = civil war in the USA, and at the very least a political nightmare even up here if Ottawa tried that. Short of a outright firearms ban, no law will keep you or the public "safe".

This is what it comes down to, and I think it's also important to note that while a firearms ban may severely restrict gun deaths, it probably won't reduce overall crime or murder. So while it may make others feel safer, I haven't seen any evidence that it will actually make people safer. I don't see why if many westerners have come to accept that Islamic terrorism is now apart of our way of life, they can't apply that same acceptance to the idea of allowing gun deaths as a result of gun ownership.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh definitely, it should have been caught and it's a failure that it wasn't but you also have to keep in mind there is only so much they can do before you get into some sketchy areas. Should you be locked in jail based on your browsing history? For how long? What can and can't you visit?

You acknowledge their was a failure in catching this terrorist. So in asking questions about how or if this can be prevented in the future, what about that is discriminatory or hateful?

- - - Updated - - -

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How is this any different that all of the progressives who have come out after terrorist attacks to suggest that there is nothing that can be done, and that this is part of living in society that has a relatively open immigration system?

[austic]

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens...

[HuMz]

They can certainly try, my only point was to show that I didn't think that was an accurate illustration. They can try and pass restrictions to make it more inconvenient for owners to purchase guns, and while that may slow down the supply side of things a tad, people will still buy guns, with over 300000000 guns already in the hands of most Americans, I haven't seen any evidence that this would have any measurable effect.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens...

What is this painfully obvious solution that every media anchor and late night show host can see, that would have prevented this?